Rail To Uptown In Time For The Super Bowl?

[RedScare]

Houston is doing well economically but that is not the only factor in determining the quality of the city.  The fact is Houston falls behind other US cities in terms of global economic impact, and the cities it trails assign a higher value to public transportation than we do. 

 

Houston is very inefficient when it comes to infrastructure spending, public transportation is a more efficient way of moving people.

 

Do you have anything to support this premise? Everything that I have read suggests that due to the higher oil prices Houston's global impact and standing have been increasing, not falling behind. You are the first I have heard suggest otherwise.

[RedScare]

Those are the most common sense issues for any average joe. Education helps your mind grow so you can achieve anything, health care takes care of you when you get sick, not if but when, and transport takes you from a to b.

 

Are you saying that you do not like money being spent on these things? It sounds like you approve of money being spent on them.

 

Are you libertarian?

[august948]

Government money's top priorities should be spent on transit, health care, and education. These are very important issues for ordinary people. I would call you cheap but its not that, libertarians want money spent but only on what they like. I don't see you complaining when billions are spent on freeways, please stop the hypocrisy.

There's a bit more to government that transit, health care and education. You're painting a narrow line with a very broad brush. Different government entities have very different focuses. Check your property tax bill, if you have one, and you'll see that a large portion of that goes to the local school district. Mine goes to both the school district and HCC. Now I could be wrong, but I'd guess eduction spending is a top priority at the school district and at HCC. I'd define transit as including anything that gets us from one place to another and enables our economic activity to continue and expand. Big part of that is the road system and you won't find me complaining about the billions well-spent on it. You might find me complaining, though, that not enough has been spent and improvements are needed. Despite the problems we have sometimes with cost, our health care system is the best in the world and putting the government in charge would have negative, not positive ramifications.

You need to look up the meaning of libertarian before you use it in such a blatantly incorrect fashion. Libertarians want government reduced or, if possible, eliminated from all aspects of society and don't advocate just spending on "what they like". In that respect, oddly enough, they come close to the marxist belief that the state will "whither away" after the proletariat takes over. As such I'm not a libertarian because I believe the government has a positive role to play. I just want it to be a pragmatic role.

[mfastx]

Do you have anything to support this premise? Everything that I have read suggests that due to the higher oil prices Houston's global impact and standing have been increasing, not falling behind. You are the first I have heard suggest otherwise.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cities

 

We are a "beta" world city, behind many "alpha" US cities.  All of those cities have significantly invested in public transportation or are currently significantly investing in public transportation. 

 

I'm sure that Houston's world standing is increasing, and doing things like investing more money in public transportation would help increase our standing even more. 

[mfastx]

There's a bit more to government that transit, health care and education. You're painting a narrow line with a very broad brush. Different government entities have very different focuses. Check your property tax bill, if you have one, and you'll see that a large portion of that goes to the local school district. Mine goes to both the school district and HCC. Now I could be wrong, but I'd guess eduction spending is a top priority at the school district and at HCC. I'd define transit as including anything that gets us from one place to another and enables our economic activity to continue and expand. Big part of that is the road system and you won't find me complaining about the billions well-spent on it. You might find me complaining, though, that not enough has been spent and improvements are needed. Despite the problems we have sometimes with cost, our health care system is the best in the world and putting the government in charge would have negative, not positive ramifications.

 

Wait, what?  I'm guessing this is a purely subjective opinion, but we are ranked 38th in the world, with the number 1 expenditure per capita. 

[august948]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cities

 

We are a "beta" world city, behind many "alpha" US cities.  All of those cities have significantly invested in public transportation or are currently significantly investing in public transportation. 

 

I'm sure that Houston's world standing is increasing, and doing things like investing more money in public transportation would help increase our standing even more. 

Well, first off, does it really matter if we're alpha or beta other than to have bragging rights? Second off, and not to unfairly dis Dallas, but the link you provide lists Dallas as an alpha city and Houston as a beta city. On that basis alone, I suspect some flaws in the methodology. Could be having a television series named after you gets you bumped in the ranks (higher name recognition) especially if it reruns worldwide.

I don't think a cause and effect has ever been truly established between alpha city status and transit options except in the minds of some urbanistas. More likely it's just a natural governmental response to growth.

[august948]

Wait, what?  I'm guessing this is a purely subjective opinion, but we are ranked 38th in the world, with the number 1 expenditure per capita. 

It might be. Post the link and I'll take a look. No doubt we're nbr 1 on expenditure, but then we live in the wealthiest nation on earth (in absolute terms) so that's not entirely unreasonable. I do know that people come here from abroad for advanced treatments and when people leave here to go to other countries for treatment it's usually because of cost or because the government requires new treatments and medicines to go through a very lengthy approval process and they are available elsewhere first.

[RedScare]

You are being rather selective in what you believe that group values in transportation.  Look at their definition...

 

 

• An advanced transportation system that includes several highways and/or a large mass transit network offering multiple modes of transportation (rapid transit, light rail, regional rail, ferry, or bus).
• Extensive and popular^[19] mass transit systems, prominent rail usage,^[20] road vehicle usage,^[21] major seaports

Note that highways and road vehicle usage are prominently displayed. Rail is not valued more than highways. I rather suspect that Houston's world class spoke and wheel highway system ranks very highly in this group's grading system.

[mfastx]

Well, first off, does it really matter if we're alpha or beta other than to have bragging rights? Second off, and not to unfairly dis Dallas, but the link you provide lists Dallas as an alpha city and Houston as a beta city. On that basis alone, I suspect some flaws in the methodology. Could be having a television series named after you gets you bumped in the ranks (higher name recognition) especially if it reruns worldwide.

I don't think a cause and effect has ever been truly established between alpha city status and transit options except in the minds of some urbanistas. More likely it's just a natural governmental response to growth.

 

Honestly it doesn't matter to me that much, I just posted that because it is worth noting that cities ranked above us assign a higher value to public transportation than we do.  It was in response to a point made earlier that we are doing better economically than cities assigning higher values to public transportation than Houston.  I admit I'm not sure what goes into the classification of Alpha or Beta cities (other than what's on the Wikipedia page), so I can't comment further. 

 

It might be. Post the link and I'll take a look. No doubt we're nbr 1 on expenditure, but then we live in the wealthiest nation on earth (in absolute terms) so that's not entirely unreasonable. I do know that people come here from abroad for advanced treatments and when people leave here to go to other countries for treatment it's usually because of cost or because the government requires new treatments and medicines to go through a very lengthy approval process and they are available elsewhere first.

 

Those are just the standard WHO rankings.  I won't comment further as to not "derail" the thread (no pun intended lol). 

 

You are being rather selective in what you believe that group values in transportation.  Look at their definition...

 

 

Note that highways and road vehicle usage are prominently displayed. Rail is not valued more than highways. I rather suspect that Houston's world class spoke and wheel highway system ranks very highly in this group's grading system.

 

I agree that a good road system is more important than a rail or general public transportation system, and I don't think rail/public transportation should be valued more than roads. 

 

But good public transportation is certainly a part of the equation and Houston is lacking in that department as of now.  I think that just upgrading our infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, and public transportation would improve our global standing.

[RedScare]

I would agree that a good public transit system is important to the citizens of a city, regardless what some group's ranking thinks. I also agree that the highway system is more important, due to movement of commerce, as well as people. However, while Houston's transit system has dropped off some in recent years, its bus system is closer to a good system, especially when park and rides are included. And despite what some may think, buses are part of public transit.

[Houston19514]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cities

 

We are a "beta" world city, behind many "alpha" US cities.  All of those cities have significantly invested in public transportation or are currently significantly investing in public transportation. 

 

I'm sure that Houston's world standing is increasing, and doing things like investing more money in public transportation would help increase our standing even more. 

 

You are referring to the GaWC study, which makes its designations based entirely and solely on "their connectivity through four 'advanced producer services':  accountancy, advertising, banking/finance, and law".   Very silly to pretend it means anything more than a ranking of cities with heavy concentrations of employment in those particular industries.

[Slick Vik]

It might be. Post the link and I'll take a look. No doubt we're nbr 1 on expenditure, but then we live in the wealthiest nation on earth (in absolute terms) so that's not entirely unreasonable. I do know that people come here from abroad for advanced treatments and when people leave here to go to other countries for treatment it's usually because of cost or because the government requires new treatments and medicines to go through a very lengthy approval process and they are available elsewhere first.

We do have advanced treatments but at the same time when a significant portion of the population doesn't have health insurance in this country that's embarrassing.

[Slick Vik]

I would agree that a good public transit system is important to the citizens of a city, regardless what some group's ranking thinks. I also agree that the highway system is more important, due to movement of commerce, as well as people. However, while Houston's transit system has dropped off some in recent years, its bus system is closer to a good system, especially when park and rides are included. And despite what some may think, buses are part of public transit.

Buses are a part of a public transit system but so is rail and so is bus rapid transit. It all has to work together. Our bus system other than the park and ride is not good, it's at best subpar. Highways are important but they have to be built strategically. I think if kept out of downtown it's best, as Seoul and Vancouver have done. But all these modes have to work together, citizens need options.

[Slick Vik]

You are being rather selective in what you believe that group values in transportation. Look at their definition...

Note that highways and road vehicle usage are prominently displayed. Rail is not valued more than highways. I rather suspect that Houston's world class spoke and wheel highway system ranks very highly in this group's grading system.

It has rail listed next to roads, are you interpreting this differently?

[Slick Vik]

Well, first off, does it really matter if we're alpha or beta other than to have bragging rights? Second off, and not to unfairly dis Dallas, but the link you provide lists Dallas as an alpha city and Houston as a beta city. On that basis alone, I suspect some flaws in the methodology. Could be having a television series named after you gets you bumped in the ranks (higher name recognition) especially if it reruns worldwide.

I don't think a cause and effect has ever been truly established between alpha city status and transit options except in the minds of some urbanistas. More likely it's just a natural governmental response to growth.

I would say we are a beta city in the sense that the top of the top for the most part don't want to move here. They want to go to New York, LA, San Francisco, Chicago, etc. Having a terrible public transportation system is a big part of that.

[RedScare]

I would say we are a beta city in the sense that the top of the top for the most part don't want to move here. They want to go to New York, LA, San Francisco, Chicago, etc. Having a terrible public transportation system is a big part of that.

 

Do you have any proof for that assertion? It sounds a bit made up. I don't even know what the "top of the top" means. For instance, a large percentage of professional athletes choose Houston as their home, even if they play elsewhere. They appreciate the weather and tax structures. Clearly, many top physicians choose Houston for its medical center. Pretty much the top of the top petroleum engineers come here. Many of the best lawyers in the country are based here. 

 

I just don't quite get where this claim comes from. I can't even imagine the "top of the top" using public transit. Please explain.

[august948]

I would say we are a beta city in the sense that the top of the top for the most part don't want to move here. They want to go to New York, LA, San Francisco, Chicago, etc. Having a terrible public transportation system is a big part of that.

And that's perfectly fine, but I doubt people say to themselves "Well, I work in the film business but it's really a toss up between LA and Houston...hmmm...LA has a train so it's LA for me!". Likewise you won't find top oil and gas talent saying, "Hmmm...Chicago or Houston...guess Chicago has the 'El' so I'll go there".

NYC, LA, SF, and Chicago are all wonderful places in their own ways. Why should we set up our policies to benefit a small minority of citizens?

[Mister X]

Great. On top of all our other problems, now we find out that our significant number of millionaires and billionaires are just second rate citizens who aren't good enough for NYC and so they were banished to live in a city with only 7 miles of light rail. What a disgrace! When they go to Superbowl LI, all the other millionaires will spit on them unless the U-line is built.

[august948]

Buses are a part of a public transit system but so is rail and so is bus rapid transit. It all has to work together. Our bus system other than the park and ride is not good, it's at best subpar. Highways are important but they have to be built strategically. I think if kept out of downtown it's best, as Seoul and Vancouver have done. But all these modes have to work together, citizens need options.

I'd like someone to explain what's so subpar about the Metro bus system. You can get pretty much from anywhere to anywhere in it's service area, which is pretty broad. Give me an example of a better system so I can compare.

[Slick Vik]

Do you have any proof for that assertion? It sounds a bit made up. I don't even know what the "top of the top" means. For instance, a large percentage of professional athletes choose Houston as their home, even if they play elsewhere. They appreciate the weather and tax structures. Clearly, many top physicians choose Houston for its medical center. Pretty much the top of the top petroleum engineers come here. Many of the best lawyers in the country are based here.

I just don't quite get where this claim comes from. I can't even imagine the "top of the top" using public transit. Please explain.

I'm basing this off talking to recruiters over the years. They find it extremely difficult to recruit the cream of the crop students to houston. It's an image thing.

[Slick Vik]

I'd like someone to explain what's so subpar about the Metro bus system. You can get pretty much from anywhere to anywhere in it's service area, which is pretty broad. Give me an example of a better system so I can compare.

Austin and San Antonio are two in the state that are better. Others i can think of are denver, seattle, portland, boston, new york, and vancouver.

As far as us, for one Metro could use a lot more crosstown routes.

[Slick Vik]

NYC, LA, SF, and Chicago are all wonderful places in their own ways. Why should we set up our policies to benefit a small minority of citizens?

I think if a thorough transit system was built it wouldn't benefit the few but a good percentage of people.

[august948]

I just don't quite get where this claim comes from. I can't even imagine the "top of the top" using public transit. Please explain.

I suspect that in Slick's world the "top of the top" may be recent college graduates who racked up enormous student loan debts and majored in economically useless things. Now those folks are in the real world and find that public transit, free health care and reduction of student loan burdens are their top priorities.

[Slick Vik]

I suspect that in Slick's world the "top of the top" may be recent college graduates who racked up enormous student loan debts and majored in economically useless things. Now those folks are in the real world and find that public transit, free health care and reduction of student loan burdens are their top priorities.

No these are people that got offers from top companies all across the country.

[august948]

Austin and San Antonio are two in the state that are better. Others i can think of are denver, seattle, portland, boston, new york, and vancouver.

As far as us, for one Metro could use a lot more crosstown routes.

Ok. There's the examples. Now please explain why the Metro Bus system is subpar in comparison to those systems. I'm especially interested in how Metro's bus system is subpar compared to Capital Metro.

[kdog08]

I honestly think if we finished the university and uptown lines, with an extra two lines, one going to each airport (and also greenspoint as a result), we would have a fairly good transit system for the city. After that, all the expansions would basically be commuter rail like westpark ROW, galveston, hempstead, Fort Bend, etc. Katy could've been another one but those tracks were ripped out unceremoniously.

 

 

I agree with the u-line and uptown line. However, I think Houston should focus on local and park&ride (commuter bus) and a "brain train" commuter rail from UTMB at Galveston to TAMU in college station. However, if we are doing an entire highway expansion we should seriously look at rail, 290 and 288 are coming up. I think next major ones after that will be 59S inside the beltway and 45S.

[august948]

No these are people that got offers from top companies all across the country.

Ok. So we've got "top of the top" narrowed down to recent college graduates (from what college(s) and with what majors?) who got job offers from top companies. And I suppose the location of said top companies wasn't really the primary driver of where the job was located and thus where the "top of the top" went. Just out of curiosity, do you work in the field of education?

[august948]

I agree with the u-line and uptown line. However, I think Houston should focus on local and park&ride (commuter bus) and a "brain train" commuter rail from UTMB at Galveston to TAMU in college station.

Every time I hear about a rail connection between TAMU and UTMB I think "party train".

[Slick Vik]

I agree with the u-line and uptown line. However, I think Houston should focus on local and park&ride (commuter bus) and a "brain train" commuter rail from UTMB at Galveston to TAMU in college station. However, if we are doing an entire highway expansion we should seriously look at rail, 290 and 288 are coming up. I think next major ones after that will be 59S inside the beltway and 45S.

You mean rail in the middle of the freeways like Chicago?

[august948]

I think if a thorough transit system was built it wouldn't benefit the few but a good percentage of people.

And I would posit that we already have a thorough transit system via the highways, local buses and park and ride buses that are used by many and can get you all over town. I'd advocate that we expand the highways and bus system further to encompass more outlying areas and serve even more people.